Further Reading

MPs have urged the UK government to adopt wide-ranging amendments to its latest bid to massively ramp up surveillance of Brits' Web activity by bringing in a so-called Snoopers' Charter.

It comes after the home office, steered by cabinet minister Theresa May, confirmed on May 26 it would make a number of tweaks to the proposed legislation—May 26 being the deadline for the Tory government's response to parliamentarians ahead of the Investigatory Powers Bill returning to the floor of the lower house of parliament early next week.

The home secretary's department told Ars that the government had agreed to make the following, relatively minor concessions:

1. Privacy Clause: In line with statements made at Committee Stage and recommendations made by the Intelligence and Security Committee of parliament, the government proposes introducing a new "privacy" clause to make it clear that warrants or other authorisations should not be granted where information could be reasonably obtained by less intrusive means.

In other words people exercising functions under the Bill will be required to have regard to the important principles that underpin the legislation. The clause will make explicit what was already implicit in the Bill. These amendments also make clear the criminal offences that apply to misuse of powers under the Bill, putting beyond doubt the severe penalties that would apply in the event of deliberate wrong-doing.

2. Protection for journalists: This amendment will make clear that the Judicial Commissioner will be required to consider the "overriding public interest" when authorising the use of Communications Data to identify a journalist's source.

3. Wilson Doctrine: These amendments will mean the Prime Minister must explicitly approve any authorisation to obtain a Parliamentarian's communications and will extend these protections to equipment interference powers used by law enforcement agencies.

4. Bulk Personal Datasets (BPDs) and medical records: This amendment will introduce a higher "exceptional and compelling" test for the retention and examination of Bulk Personal Datasets which include medical records. The Government has been clear that the security and intelligence agencies do not currently hold such records and would only seek to do so in exceptional circumstances.

5. A small number of other minor and technical amendments that provide additional clarity and respond to commitments made in Committee.

However, proposed line-by-line amendments tabled by MPs of all stripes press for bigger changes to the contentious draft bill. For example, members are urging the government to place "Offence of unlawful use of investigatory powers" on the face of the bill. MPs supporting that particular amendment said:

On behalf of the intelligence and security committee of parliament, to provide for a unified offence for the misuse of intrusive investigatory powers at the beginning of the bill, in Part 1, rather than having each offence scattered throughout the bill or in other legislation.

SNP politician Gavin Newlands, who laid out his party's concerns about the IPB in the annals of Ars last month, has called for a variety of stringent safeguards within the proposed law in relation to—among other things—warrants, hacking powers, and judicial oversight.

It would seem that, regardless of May's concessions that some have already labelled to be mere window-dressing, the stage is now set for heated debates in the House of Commons next week.